Taken as an example of the craft of speechmaking, Gov. King’s feisty Internet address on the proposal to list Atlantic salmon under the Endangered Species Act was one of his best efforts — well-constructed and well-delivered, it had punch and a touch of wit.

The impact of those words remains to be seen, but it likely won’t be what was intended, unless the intent — highly unlikely — was to make the rightfully worried people of Washington County even more fearful of the future and to make the rightfully indignant federal agencies in Washington, D.C., even more determined to move ahead with the listing.

The first of the speech’s three segments was a defense of the 2-year-old state conservation plan and a complaint that the ESA listing is premature. The governor is correct in saying that the plan contained virtually all of the habitat protection and enhancement measures any state could reasonably be expected to undertake; he errs in exaggerating this state’s progress in the implementation.

The governor said a nameless “some” have alleged that the state “blew it.” Among that “some” are some very visible people, including several members of the local volunteer watershed councils who have publically and frequently criticized the state’s lack of commitment to the plan. Two sessions of the Legislature were held since the plan went into effect, yet there were no substantial legislative initiatives to back it up, certainly nothing — given the capital needs faced by agriculture and aquaculture — that reflected the enormity of what was at stake. Complaints that state agencies were holding up progress on the placement of weirs were persistent. The straightforward issue of alternative irrigation methods is in some limbo of studies and regulatory wrangling.

The fact that the state commission charged with overseeing the plan held its first meeting just this September, one year and nine months after it was accepted in lieu of the federal listing, underscores the impression that the state’s approach, while not neglectful, was somewhat liesurely. The state plan was under assault by pro-listing environmental groups from the start. Bold action with at least one immediate and irrefutable accomplishment was required.

The second part of the speech questioned the very premise of the listing, the genetic uniqueness of the wild Atlantic salmon. It’s a fascinating point of scientific debate that will be given further study, but it is wishful thinking to hope that any resolution will come in time to “save” Maine from a listing. And the point contradicts the governor’s actions from 1997, when he committed the state to a plan based upon genetic uniqueness.

The conclusion of the speech, which devolved from a call for enhanced state and federal cooperation into picking a fight — unabashed fed bashing, with, in addition to the implied threat that Maine will sue the federal government, a vision of a federal takeover of Washington County and the devastation of that fragile economy by litigation and a freeze on business investment.

And that is the real issue. The impacts salmon restoration will have upon Washington County’s resource-based economy, whether done under an ESA listing or a state plan, will be significant. A genuine commitment by the state, including a financial commitment, to help businesses in that poor region survive this challenge, even thrive, would be a worthy topic for the governor’s next speech.